This following is a working EXAMPLE to address the revised criterion B.
Criterion A: Presentation of the Issue
Using the search terms "Michelle" and "Obama" in the Google image search engine resulted in the top ranking image to be a doctored image of Michelle Obama that was 'ostensibly photo-edited to resemble a monkey'. The image was considered extremely offensive with many complaints reported to Google. Google removed the site from the search index not because the image was deemed to be offensive but because the site was serving malware to visitors. The image has now reappeared on a blog and remains the top ranked image with the search terms. (Heussner, 2009) This is the first paragraph that addresses the news item and the issue in the news item.
Google image search is a popular search engine that locates images within websites and uses a complex algorithm to determine the top page rank of search terms. There is no human intervention unless the content violates laws in order to protect the integrity of the search results. (Source: Google). 2nd paragraph describes the IT system (which can then be expanded in B). The last sentence add more details as to the type of issue - in this case PEOPLE & MACHINES. (You do no have to explicitly categorize the issue using the list in the guide).
Despite many complaints and publicity, Google has not excluded the offensive image from its search results but has had to use valuable advertising revenue to post their own advertisement above the offending image to explain why the image appears as the first result. In addition, Google has had to issue a statement to defend their method for producing search result (CNET, 2009). In addition to losing revenue from placing this advertisement, the subsequent publicity may also dissuade users from using Google resulting in further loss of revenue. 3rd paragraph describes the impact of the issue on Google (loss of earnings).
What is the area of impact? It is not specifically clear here...it could be is Arts, Leisure and Entertainment as the image was posted in a blog however I would suggest that as Google is losing revenue as a result of this, it could be Business and Employment. Therefore some additional research to give another example of companies losing revenue due to results generated by algorithms would add to this.
Please note:
The sources are not in the correct format and need to be changed.
This has been created as an example only.
Word length is a little over 180 words. Should aim for 150 words for A
Criterion B: IT Background of the Issue
There are two stages to this issue. Firstly, the ability to obtain, edit photo and post a remix of an image on the Internet and secondly a method of ensuring that the image will become a top ranking result in a search engine. A digital image can be obtained easily through any means of electronic communication, such as from downloading from a website. It can then be editing using image-editing software where, in this example, the proportions of the image have been altered to increase the width of the head and the facial features and colour has also been applied to the facial features.
Secondly, the image would have to be uploaded to a website, which in this example, was a blog hosted by Google, which is fairly simple to use and requires little technical skills. Then the image would need to be indexed by Google. The search engine is question is Google Image Search which uses an algorithm, PageRank, to determine how far to the top a page is ranked in a search. The three main factors are the frequency of the key terms, the length of time the page has existed and the number of pages that actually link to this page. In the case of an image, the meta-data of the image, the link text that points to the image and the text surrounding the image is indexed and stored on a database (Taranfx, 2009) ("Google Image Search", 2009). When a search query of performed, the results are based on these factors. In addition there are some methods that web designers can to do increase the factors by embedding additional, invisible code into the website's source code and although this is violates Google's code, which should result in these sites being removed from the index. One source speculates that the site is using large numbers of 'inbound links' to increase the ranking however as this would violate Google's Webmaster guidelines, and as the image remains in the index, it suggests that other factors are involved (Sumner, 2009).
As there are two distinct stages, it is possible that the creation of the offensive image and the second posting of the image into a blog and a potential 'gaming' of Google's search algorithm may have been the work of two entirely different groups or individuals.
Note:
A diagram could be included to compare the before and after effects of the photo-editing - however for copyright reasons, this has not been included here as this is an open, public site.
It is difficult to decide how much detail to give in order to gain maximum marks but to remain within the word count. Please note the commentary for level 5: "This again need not be exhaustive, but should be achievable by a student bearing in mind their age and the word limit for the individual portfolio item. The key determinant of this level will be that the student has analysed the IT system rather than explained it" The analysis mark may be awarded for the final sentence of the second paragraph and the final paragraph.
The word count of this section is 370 words which is a little high.
(Make sure that you have the news item in this list and that you sort in alphabetical order by author last name).
CNET. "Google: Michelle Obama pic not our fault." KTVA. Alaska Broadcasting Company, Inc., 24 Nov. 2009. Web. 30 Nov. 2009. <http://www.ktva.com/ci_13855451>
Criterion A: Presentation of the Issue
Using the search terms "Michelle" and "Obama" in the Google image search engine resulted in the top ranking image to be a doctored image of Michelle Obama that was 'ostensibly photo-edited to resemble a monkey'. The image was considered extremely offensive with many complaints reported to Google. Google removed the site from the search index not because the image was deemed to be offensive but because the site was serving malware to visitors. The image has now reappeared on a blog and remains the top ranked image with the search terms. (Heussner, 2009)This is the first paragraph that addresses the news item and the issue in the news item.
Google image search is a popular search engine that locates images within websites and uses a complex algorithm to determine the top page rank of search terms. There is no human intervention unless the content violates laws in order to protect the integrity of the search results. (Source: Google).
2nd paragraph describes the IT system (which can then be expanded in B). The last sentence add more details as to the type of issue - in this case PEOPLE & MACHINES. (You do no have to explicitly categorize the issue using the list in the guide).
Despite many complaints and publicity, Google has not excluded the offensive image from its search results but has had to use valuable advertising revenue to post their own advertisement above the offending image to explain why the image appears as the first result. In addition, Google has had to issue a statement to defend their method for producing search result (CNET, 2009). In addition to losing revenue from placing this advertisement, the subsequent publicity may also dissuade users from using Google resulting in further loss of revenue.
3rd paragraph describes the impact of the issue on Google (loss of earnings).
What is the area of impact? It is not specifically clear here...it could be is Arts, Leisure and Entertainment as the image was posted in a blog however I would suggest that as Google is losing revenue as a result of this, it could be Business and Employment. Therefore some additional research to give another example of companies losing revenue due to results generated by algorithms would add to this.
Please note:
Criterion B: IT Background of the Issue
There are two stages to this issue. Firstly, the ability to obtain, edit photo and post a remix of an image on the Internet and secondly a method of ensuring that the image will become a top ranking result in a search engine. A digital image can be obtained easily through any means of electronic communication, such as from downloading from a website. It can then be editing using image-editing software where, in this example, the proportions of the image have been altered to increase the width of the head and the facial features and colour has also been applied to the facial features.
Secondly, the image would have to be uploaded to a website, which in this example, was a blog hosted by Google, which is fairly simple to use and requires little technical skills. Then the image would need to be indexed by Google. The search engine is question is Google Image Search which uses an algorithm, PageRank, to determine how far to the top a page is ranked in a search. The three main factors are the frequency of the key terms, the length of time the page has existed and the number of pages that actually link to this page. In the case of an image, the meta-data of the image, the link text that points to the image and the text surrounding the image is indexed and stored on a database (Taranfx, 2009) ("Google Image Search", 2009). When a search query of performed, the results are based on these factors. In addition there are some methods that web designers can to do increase the factors by embedding additional, invisible code into the website's source code and although this is violates Google's code, which should result in these sites being removed from the index. One source speculates that the site is using large numbers of 'inbound links' to increase the ranking however as this would violate Google's Webmaster guidelines, and as the image remains in the index, it suggests that other factors are involved (Sumner, 2009).
As there are two distinct stages, it is possible that the creation of the offensive image and the second posting of the image into a blog and a potential 'gaming' of Google's search algorithm may have been the work of two entirely different groups or individuals.
Note:
Criterion C
Please see other examples: Portfolio Example - Instant Messaging and Portfolio Example - Laptops in SchoolsCriterion D
Please see other examples: Portfolio Example - Instant MessagingCriterion E
(Make sure that you have the news item in this list and that you sort in alphabetical order by author last name).CNET. "Google: Michelle Obama pic not our fault." KTVA. Alaska Broadcasting Company, Inc., 24 Nov. 2009. Web. 30 Nov. 2009. <http://www.ktva.com/ci_13855451>
"Google Image Search." Wikipedia. 12 Nov. 2009. Web. 30 Nov. 2009. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Image_Search>.
Heussner, Ki Mae. "Google Explains Offensive Michelle Obama Image in Search Results." ABC News. 24 Nov. 2009. Web. 30 Nov. 2009. <http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/AheadoftheCurve/google-explains-offensive-michelle-obama-image-search-results/story?id=9165099>.
Lemon, Sumner. "Racist Image Tops Google Search Results for Michelle Obama." Yahoo! Tech News. IDG News Service, 25 Nov. 2009. Web. 30 Nov. 2009. <http://tech.yahoo.com/news/pcworld/20091125/tc_pcworld/racistimagetopsgooglesearchresultsformichelleobama_1>.
Taranfx. "How Google Image search works? Hear it from experts." Taranfx. N.p., 4 May 2009. Web. 30 Nov. 2009. <http://www.taranfx.com/blog/
how-google-image-search-works-hear-it-from-experts>